The arbitrary age of consent is not about protecting women/girls. It is about valuing females and their virtue over males and their freedom. The intent of the laws is to stop older men from having sex with younger women and that is how it is enforced. It was never intended to stop younger men from having sex with older women. This is only possible in a society that values females over males, the same society that has so many other examples of legalized discrimination based on sex as long as that sex is male – violence laws such as VAWA, domestic violence laws, family court, accusations of sexual assault & harassment, all criminal sentencing, military conscription, circumcision, etc. We live in a society where misandry runs rampant, unchecked, and enforced by the law.
RIP Jayhammers.blogspot.comJay Hammers closed down his famous Men’s Rights blog, jayhammers.blogspot.com for private reasons. Unfortunately, he did not just cease to publish, but took down the entire blog. With Jay Hammers gracious permission, I repost Jay Hammers “Age of Consent is Misandry”. Jay Hammer’s “Age of Consent is Misandry” is a provocative, politically incorrect and irreverent article. The language is often strong and alienated even lots Men’s Rights’ activists. We at Human-Stupidity.com repost Jay Hammer’s “Age of Consent is Misandry” as a historical document, without further comment. We do invite comments at the end of this post!
* r/mensrightsmovement: Reddit Men’s Rights Movement
|
Age of consent laws are designed to punish beta males. A beta male in his 20s, unsuccessful with women his own age who are infused with a sense of feminist entitlement and deride all but the top alpha males who take interest in them, who seeks companionship with a younger, sexually mature female who desires him, should not go to prison for acting on that which is normal male sexuality. A society that criminalizes this is a society that values females over males and treats women as if they are children.
If we are to treat women as children then we should be consistent. Young women who have sex with older men are as much victims as women who have sex with a pick-up artist after meeting at a club. In both cases, feminists are angry because the woman has been “fooled” into having sex with a less than ideal mate in terms of value. In the first case, the male appears to be of higher value than he really is because he is older and more experienced. In the second case, the male appears to be of higher value than he really is because he has learned the elements of attraction. In both cases, women are presumed (by feminists) to have no responsibility for their own actions and to be little more than children, than animals who are guided only by instinct.
This is what makes feminists angry and this is why age of consent exists still today, because it is assumed women are not mentally mature enough to give consent AND because older women want to limit men’s options to increase their own value in the sexual marketplace. Older women, however, are generally not of a much higher intelligence level than teenage girls. The big difference between the two is that older women are less attractive and that is what makes them so damn angry.
The reason feminists paint all men as perverts, as rapists, is to reinforce the notion that men who seek sex with women, be they pick-up artists or men interested in young women, are mentally ill, when in fact they are simply expressing completely normal male sexuality. This allows feminists to paint women as victims and men as perpetrators. A beta male in his 20s in a relationship with a teenage girl is, far more often than not, simply enjoying the companionship, both physical and emotional. Feminists, however, would have us believe that a college kid computer nerd who dates a teenager is doing it with some evil intentions. This is a lie. A large number of sex offenders these days are simply men who were punished for normal sexuality or in the wrong place at the wrong time, with the wrong girl. Age of consent laws do not stop the real rapists and molestors; instead they put plenty of good men in prison.
Females generally do not significantly mature mentally past puberty so it should always be illegal for any woman to have sex or it should never be illegal for any woman to have sex. There is no arbitrary age where females suddenly become self-aware, realizing the consequences of their actions, and stop seeking out alpha males. Thus there must not be an arbitrary age of consent for sex. There is no arbitrary age where males suddenly stop seeking out attractive, fertile females. Thus there must not be an arbitrary age RANGE of consent for sex either.
If anything, it should be illegal for women to have sex with men until men have been educated on the truths of women, Marriage 2.0, Game, feminism, and men’s rights. If any woman were to seek out sexual audience with a man who has not received his golden certificate showing he has completed his training and has had the snip done to ensure he is not cuckolded, then she should be confined to a prison term of no less than 20 years, with weekly forced anal and vaginal rape. This makes as much sense as requiring men to professionally examine a woman’s ID to verify her age and that the ID is not forged, and to have documented video evidence of sex with her to avoid a false rape claim, to ensure he is not sent to pound-me-in-the-ass prison arbitrarily.
(reposted with permission from Jay Hammers from his deleted blog JayHammers.blogspot.com)
If you don’t think the age-of-consent laws are fair and you get called to jury duty for a frivolous and malicious statutory rape case, do what any intelligent individual would do. VOTE “NOT GUILTY”! Never mind what the law says. If the law is unfair, you as a juror have the right to vote against its enforcement.
Holy shit!!
“Females generally do not significantly mature mentally past puberty so it should always be illegal for any woman to have sex or it should never be illegal for any woman to have sex.”
So, from the day we have our first period, women don’t mature mentally? We remain at the developmental stage of a 6, 12, or 14 year old? Would you, as a man whom I assume to be in your 20s given your hot defence of this group, really feel good about grooming a 6 year old and thrusting your penis into her tiny body?
We’re incapable of developing discernment, advancing educationally, learning to see through and reject the bullshit of exploitive and predatory men, incapable of growing in wisdom and grace?
You say that women in their 20s find you unattractive and don’t want to have sex with you. Instead of turning to children to ease your itch, why don’t you take this as teachable moments and find out why women of your age don’t want to jump your bones?
It seems that a majority of this ‘anti-misandry’ people make weak arguments in favour of ‘love knows no age’ argument. Let’s start off with this, shall we?
“Age of consent laws are designed to punish beta males. A beta male in his 20s, unsuccessful with women his own age who are infused with a sense of feminist entitlement and deride all but the top alpha males who take interest in them who seeks companionship with a younger, sexually mature female who desires him, should not go to prison for acting on that which is normal male sexuality. A society that criminalizes this is a society that values females over males and treats women as if they are children.”
This is wrong, because beta males, by the way, ARE NOT successful with women. They are considered weak, effete, and poor father material, which is ultimately what a woman wants. Women can deride the alphas all they want; it doesn’t mean the men are going to marry them, and if they insist on being entitled feminists, the alphas will never see them as wives as at all. The OP assumes women WANT beta males; we do not. The OP assumes beta males getting successful with younger, inexperienced women who also want an alpha male to protect them is also incorrect.
This isn’t evidence of a ‘society that favours women over men’. It’s just evolution: women want men that will be dads, not cads. A beta male is not a real male. Men as well as women should act like adults, and women shouldn’t be blamed for a beta male’s lower hierarchy. We’re choosy for a reason.
“If we are to treat women as children then we should be consistent. Young women who have sex with older men are as much victims as women who have sex with a pick-up artist after meeting at a club. In both cases, feminists are angry because the woman has been “fooled” into having sex with a less than ideal mate in terms of value.” – Except women are not children – not if they are adults – and if a grown woman has sex with an older man, she is free to do so, and if she has sex with a PUA – shame on her – well, that is her own fault. But we are talking about women, not teenage girls.
“In the first case, the male appears to be of higher value than he really is because he is older and more experienced. In the second case, the male appears to be of higher value than he really is because he has learned the elements of attraction. In both cases, women are presumed (by feminists) to have no responsibility for their own actions and to be little more than children, than animals who are guided only by instinct.” – PUAs don’t know the elements of attraction, sorry. You can quote Roosh all you want, but PUAs don’t actually know how to talk to women aside from bar sluts. Higher-class women are going to see right through that facade and kick him to the curb. For all the talk about laws of attraction, beta males don’t seem to realize women’s higher standards are a reflection of them picking a proper mate. If women see a weak man, she isn’t going to want him – the same as a man having such standards for ugly women.
“This is what makes feminists angry and this is why age of consent exists still today, because it is assumed women are not mentally mature enough to give consent AND because older women want to limit men’s options to increase their own value in the sexual marketplace. Older women, however, are generally not of a much higher intelligence level than teenage girls. The big difference between the two is that older women are less attractive and that is what makes them so damn angry.” – Not sure where this came from, but the age of consent is there so that children of both sexes are protected from exploitation. We are, again, talking about women – grown women – not teenagers or young girls and boys. Had this been reversed and we were discussion exploitation of boys by women due to age gaps, there’d be outcry. Yet it is acceptable for women? Hmm.
By the way, what’s the point of writing about Sweden’s rape statistics from Muslims when you ARE making the argument for the age of consent to be abolished? Why should a seven-year-old that is gang-raped by migrants be considered a victim when the age of consent should be abolished? Those migrants were just enjoying sex. It was healthy, right? And kids can consent, can’t they?
See the problem with that reasoning?
“The reason feminists paint all men as perverts, as rapists, is to reinforce the notion that men who seek sex with women, be they pick-up artists or men interested in young women, are mentally ill, when in fact they are simply expressing completely normal male sexuality.” – We are talking about beta men, who are upset they cannot get with women their own age, with younger girls that don’t know any better. This is exploitation. This isn’t ‘normal’ male sexuality, either, unless you’re an asshole. We are talking about women, not younger girls, and you need to make the difference clear. Yet for all the attacks on feminists, you are actually acting exactly like them when it comes to turning a blind eye to rape and abuse.
“This allows feminists to paint women as victims and men as perpetrators. A beta male in his 20s in a relationship with a teenage girl is, far more often than not, simply enjoying the companionship, both physical and emotional.” – Women do not get with beta males, get over it.
“Feminists, however, would have us believe that a college kid computer nerd who dates a teenager is doing it with some evil intentions. This is a lie. A large number of sex offenders these days are simply men who were punished for normal sexuality or in the wrong place at the wrong time, with the wrong girl.” – If the girl is aware of how old the man is, she should do the right thing and wait until she is of age. If the man lies and tells her he is younger than he really is, he is manipulating her. If you want to prove sex offenders are innocent, you need proof, and citing the KKK or whatever will not help you.
No wonder the MRA is going to go tits up. This many beta males complaining that women won’t date them and them boasting about going after 17-year-old girls (many of which probably never came on to you) is a pipe dream. Really. You are no different from the feminists or migrants. You just want free reign to the underage pussy because a woman said no to your unappealing ass.
Read again: beta men don’t get women. Alphas do. And no alpha is going to legitimately write a post on how child porn or age of consent laws are ‘misandry’. The article is six years old, but still: you guys are fucked up. Roissy, Roosh – how did you think you’d survive?
DONT GET involved in ANY way with a western woman white black or brindle.
The pill had a lot to do with releasing the bond on women that kept them more or less equal (taking into account many factors) with men.
Sexual freedom created the feminist world we have.
I married (second time around dont need to say where first one was from) an asian girl from a country that doesnt place its females on a pedistal and the unavailability of the pill to younger women makes them less arrogant towards men less self important.
My wife now is no wimp (has a will of her own has passion has fight) but she certainly is no feminist .
Give you an idea of western women. Best friend of my ex wife had a twinkle in her eye when she pondered my exs mother. Now the mother in law was/is a piece of work. Lazy bitch husband(exfather in law did everything at home and than went to work) The exs friend saw her as a role model wonderful woman. Ex mother in laws word was law hubby never dared to have his own mind.
any way dont even look locally . the mind set is anti male unless your like the ex father in law
Why don’t you just admit that you have paedophilic tendencies and would like to have sex with 12 year olds? Life will be a lot easier when you do. There’s nothing wrong with women in their 20s, you pervert.
Why is this abusive person’s comment still here?
@Sequel: this abusive comment gives us a reminder of the real world craze and witch hunts. Personal attacks, defamation, all weapons are fair game to silence dissent.
They are a good reminder, as long as they don’t totally overwhelm this site. I wish “good people” like Sequel would comment more!
Jay: great to hear. I’m still pretty much in solid agreement with what you wrote.
Anyone wants to, feel free to use this image. I put on my Imgur, and I think it’s timely and a tad but funny at the same time. But also very serious:
http://i.imgur.com/QxBhK.jpg
If you could replace the one on the right – she looks angry. Haha.
Here, try this 1:
http://www.mediafire.com/i/?fjz8uytj4ga9m3e
It’s hard to detail right now, because the Paul Elam video that attacks Jay (titled: “Killing The Cause”) is now made private. You might try getting on Paul’s Youtube friends list & go from there. (http://www.youtube.com/user/TheHappyMisogynist?blend=11&ob=5) Might have to ask him to see it, idk.
Also, the controversry is mentioned at the following:
http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/cxxqe/age_of_consent_is_misandry/
http://www.the-spearhead.com/2010/07/22/new-moderator/#comment-34461
http://www.the-spearhead.com/2011/01/31/fraternity-and-factionalism/#comment-68252
Basically Paul accuses Jay of wanting to have sex with 10-year-olds. I think Hammers has some responses to the accusations, but those are hard to find as well. Might want to ask Jay for them.
Paul and I have made amends. He is well aware that I have no interest in children. He is also well aware that this is a touchy subject which many people react to vigorously.
Thanks for re-posting this. Have you considered challenging Paul Elam to a debate?
I heard rumors about serious conflict with Paul Elam regarding this article. Can you fill me in with details?
Paul Elam is doing great work.
But I noticed, there is a movement of father’s rights people who are absolutely in favor of total sexual repression. That think it is right to go to jail for 15 years for looking at photos of 15 year old girls dressed in Leotards dancing provocatively. Or for having a 17 year old lover. Or for photographing your girl friend nude, who can have sex with you (age of consent 16), but her photos are crime. That is very sad. ;
http://human-stupidity.com/science/evolution-psychology-darwin/repressive-sex-laws-in-land-of-the-free-polygyny-in-birds
If you look for my comments on Robert Kurzban, he explained that not only older women but actually all beta males stand to gain from monogamy and sexual repression. And even the alpha males stand to gain from it, because they outwardly favor sexual repression (as a rule for others) and then don’t obey their own rules.
This blog is an unfortunate example of people only seeking opinions that conform with their own. Remember, female suffrage is less than one hundred years old. Within that time frame women have also still been considered possessions of the men most closely attached to them. And the age of consent is not arbitrary. It may not be perfect but it is loosely based on the age by which the vast majority of individuals have reached sexual maturity. (Remember, just because a person has adult sexual physical features does not mean they have reached their full psychological sexual maturity)
In Canada the age of consent is 16, probably quite young enough. 18 may be older than necessary but not by much.
I’m not certain maturity can be accessed or determined as easily as you assume:
http://drrobertepstein.com/pdf/Epstein-THE_MYTH_OF_THE_TEEN_BRAIN-Scientific_American_Mind-4-07.pdf
http://www.youthspecialties.com/blog/is-adolescence-a-myth/
http://homedisciplingdad.blogspot.com/2007/10/myth-of-adolescence.html
http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Adolescence-Responsible-Children-Irresponsible/dp/1891833510
“Female suffrage is less then 100 years old”. No, universal suffrage is less than 100 years old. In England, 150 years ago no more than 5% were allowed to vote. That is, 95% were not. As to sexual maturity, it should be based on physiology. Why on earth should “psychological maturity” lag physiological maturity? Surely because psychological maturity is something feminists can decide to suit their own agenda.
“Concerned Man” you have either lost your balls, or more likely: you mispelled your name: Concerned WOMan.
Whatever your gender, you are clearly an idiot (or a Feminist which is the same). I’m sure you’ll understand since you discuss psycology in your comments, thus it is also clear that you have reached, or should I say passed the age of sexual (and psycological?) maturity…
strong ad hominem, weak argument
By the way, my whole point with this article was that an arbitrary age of consent will send innocent males to prison. We can do better than an arbitrary age of consent that doesn’t take into account the maturity of the male and the female. And to be very clear, I am NOT talking about child sex: I am talking about men and women. Sex with children is a crime. Attraction to healthy, fertile women can only be considered a crime in a misandric society. I really think we can do better, but this is only one example of societal misandry. All injustices concern me.
Roissy may have made my point better than I ever did: http://roissy.wordpress.com/2010/07/08/hank-moody-chump/
“Which brings me to a larger issue. What the fuck is up with statutory rape? It’s a joke law made up by joke legislators without a scintilla of real world experience with women. Am I supposed to request age identification from every full-bodied young woman who comes onto me? There are 13 year olds out there who look like grown women. At the borderline of 16 to 18 years old, many women could easily pass for mid to late 20s. It is well known by neuroscientists and psychologists studying these things that women mature faster than men. Women’s brains gel into adult-shaped contours sooner. A full breasted and wide-hipped 17 year old hottie who flirts with me knows exactly what she is doing and what she wants. She is no child to be coddled. And yet, I could be thrown in jail if I slept with her assuming she was an older girl, even if it was something we both consensually desired.
This is abject bullshit. The law makes it a necessity to demand age identification with every young woman a man might want to fuck who could conceivably pass for a teenager. This means background checks on women in their 20s. And what about women who lie? They exist, lots of them. Is a statutory rape charge for the man the just response — the *fair* response — to a lying woman who wanted the sex as much as he?
It’s time to end the charade of statutory rape. If the “underage” woman is physically developed, and she consents to the sex, there is no rape charge, period. For chrissakes, there are 14 year olds in parts of the world getting married off and pumping out children of their own.”
I read this most usefully information age of misandry. I like this because this information use for all. So I say this post is also good. I satisfy in this post. Your explain ideas I attract this post helpfully.
angelsphonesex.co.uk/
“By the way: the MRA’s who bashed Hammers are all Liberals: not Conservatives: you are wrong about that.”
If you define a liberal as an American who doesn’t think that homosexuals will necessarily burn in hell or that adultorous women should stoned to death then, yes, possibly.
It was a very personal attack on Jay Hammers.
You could take any entry on any pro-male blog or anti-feminist/mra/mgtow blog: and twist it to infer anything about the author’s character.
It is what feminists do to men ALL THE TIME: read the manboobz blog for examples.
Doesn’t anybody else find it curious that MRA’s did exactly this to other MRA’s?
The MRM is already infected with feminism and misandry: I suppose I ineptly tried to point this out in my blog.
I will continue to do so: nobody will stop me.
By the way: the MRA’s who bashed Hammers are all Liberals: not Conservatives: you are wrong about that.
In fact: they hate conservatives with a passion: do the research yourself.
Reading this again, it astounds me that anyone could think that this could possibly ‘bring down’ the men’s rights movement.
If we can’t question feminist laws that are increasingly being used to jail thousands of men as subhumans, we may as well all give up.
I think what those mras who rounded on Jay for this essay really meant are that articles like this could kill the takeover of the MRM as merely a Conservative Father’s association. Here here to that, I say.